PHIL 1301
Mind, World, and Knowledge
Eros Corazza
Carleton University
Department of Philosophy
Term:
Meetings:
Venue:
Instructor:
Office:
Office h.:
Phone:
Email:
Summer 2007 (Mai 16 – June 26)
Tuesdays and Thursdays 10:35-1:25 (12 meetings)
TB 202
Eros Corazza
Paterson Hall 3A41
by appointment
520-2600 Ext: 2326
eros_corazza@yahoo.com; eros_corazza@carleton.ca
Webpage: http://www.carleton.ca/~ecorazza/
 The PowerPoint slides are posted on my webpage.
2
Course description
Descartes, one of the central figure of the rationalist school, brought to the
philosophical forum questions such as “What am I?”, “Does one’s mind
differ from one’s body?” and if so, “How does the mind interact with the
body?”. The Cartesians observed that some phenomena of nature (e.g. the
mastery of language) do not fall within the mechanical philosophy of their
time: they thus posited a new entity, the res cogitans (the mind) to account
for these phenomena. In rejecting the mechanical philosophy, nowadays
rationalists are in a position to deal with Descartes’ traditional questions in a
new way. In this Chomsky’s foundational works on language (and the
cognitive revolution he initiated) play a central role and welcome new
solutions and dissolutions to some traditional philosophical puzzles.
Aims and Objectives
The module aims to provide students with a good knowledge of Descartes and rationalist
philosophy of mind and to appreciate how recent studies on the foundation of language
can deal with some of the Cartesian traditional problems.
Learning Outcomes
By the end of the class students will appreciate:




the deepness of Descartes’ philosophy of mind,
some rationalist developments of it (e.g. Arnauld and Leibniz)
the actuality of some puzzles he proposed and dealt with and
the way the latter can be handled within some contemporary form of rationalism.
By engaging in constructive discussion and by critically evaluating some theses and
arguments presented, students will also acquire:


the capacity to communicate ideas clearly and concisely in both written and verbal
form and
to engage with others in constructive debate.
Through essays writing and the feedback:

you will further develop the capacity to present problems and propose solutions to
them in a clear, precise and concise way.
3
Requirements
It is mandatory to have a Carleton student “connect” account and to register on WebCT.
Assignments
One short essay and a final (2 h.) exam


Short Essay (1500 words maximum)
Final exam (answer 2 questions out of 5 or 6)
Due Assignment


Short Essay: Tuesday June 5 2007
Final exam: Exam Period (June 27-30) (a 2 hour exam)
Weight: 30%
Weight: 70%
4
Texts Recommended

The books are available at Haven Books (Sunnyside).
Primary literature:




Chomsky, N., 1966, Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist
Thought, Harper & Row, New York
Chomsky, N., 2000, New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind, Cambridge
UP, Cambridge
Descartes, R., 1985, The Philosophical Writing Vol. I, Cambridge UP, Cambridge
Descartes, R., 1984, The Philosophical Writing Vol. II, Cambridge UP, Cambridge
Main texts that will be discussed and that you should read:

Descartes, R. 1641, Meditations
In: Descartes, R., 1984, The Philosophical Writing Vol. II, Cambridge UP,
Cambridge
Other editions available (also on the net).
Descartes’ Meditations (with Critics and Replies) + Discourse free at:
 http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/f_descarte.html
Leibniz’s Nouveau Essays (introduction and first 2 chapters) free at:
 http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/f_leibniz.html
Secondary literature: In bold the most useful texts







Antony, L. M. & Hornstein, N. (eds.), 2003, Chomsky and His Critics, Blackwell,
Oxford
Calvin, W.-H. & Bickerton, D., 2000, Lingua ex Machine, MIT, Cambridge
Cottingham, J., 1986, Descartes, Blackwell, Oxford
Jolley N. (2005). Leibniz. Routledge, London
McGilvray, J., 1999, Chomsky: Language, Mind, and Politics, Polity Press,
Cambridge
Smith, N., 1999, Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals, Cambridge UP, Cambridge
Wilson, C., 2003, Descartes’s Meditations: An Introduction, Cambridge UP,
Cambridge
5
Net Resources (Free of charge)
Episteme links:
http://www.epistemelinks.com/
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
http://plato.stanford.edu/
***********************************************************************
Essay
You should write—1500 words (or 6 typewritten double-spaced pages)
maximum—on one of the following tree questions:
1. Why, according to Descartes, the idea of God is innate?
2. What is the importance of God in Descartes’ philosophy?
3. “I cannot share the opinion of Montaigne and others who
attribute understanding or thought to animals” (Letters to the
Marquis of New Castle 23 Nov. 1646; CSMK III: 302).
Discuss.
6
Topics to be discussed
Each topic requires a 3 h class
1. Descartes
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Descartes, Meditation 1 and 2
Cottingham, ch. 1, ch. 2
2. Descartes on God and His Existence
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Descartes, Meditation 3 and 4
Cottingham, ch. 3
3. Ideas and Reality
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Descartes, Meditation 4, 5 and 6
Cottingham, ch. 4
4. Leibniz: Metaphysics
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Leibniz, Monadology
Jolley, Leibniz
5. Leibniz on Mind, Knowledge, and Ideas
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Leibniz, New Essays, Introduction and ch. 1
Jolley, Leibniz
6. Mechanism and Linguistic Creativity
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Arnauld & Nicole, Port Royal Grammar
Chomsky, Cartesian Linguistics (+ Introduction)
McGilvray, ch. 2, ch. 3
7
7. Universal Grammar
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Arnauld & Nicole, Port Royal Grammar
Chomsky, Cartesian Linguistics
McGilwray, ch. 2, ch. 3
8. Res Cogitans and Dualism
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Descartes’ Meditations, Fourth set of Objections (Arnauld) +
Descartes’ Reply
Chomsky, New Horizons, ch. 4
Cottingham, ch. 5
9. Dualism and Its Problems
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Chomsky, New Horizons, ch.1, ch. 4
Louise & Horenstein (eds.), Chomsky and His Critics: Lycan’s
article (ch. 1) + Chomsky’s reply
Cottingham, ch. 5
10. The Poverty of the Stimulus Argument
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Chomsky, New Horizons, ch. 6, ch. 7
McGilvray, ch. 3, ch. 4
11. Language Origins and Development
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
Chomsky, New Horizons, ch. 3, ch. 5
Calvin & Bickerton, Lingua ex Machina
12. Evolution and Rationalism
Primary reading:
Secondary reading:
all you read so far
all you read so far
8
The Fine Print – Policies and Rules
1. WebCT mandatory. Every student must have a “connect” student computing account, in
order to use WebCT. Grades are visible on it.
2. Written work. No handwritten essays will be accepted; they must be typed or wordprocessed. Use a title page and identify yourself by student number only. Use any reference
style, but use it consistently. Writing in the first person (e.g., “I will argue that …,” “I find
this difficult to believe because…”) is permitted.
3. Extensions. Deadlines will be extended only in case of documentable medical or personal
emergencies. Excuses like “I had to work on my History essay” will not be accepted.
4. Penalties. Essays are due by 4:00 p.m. on due dates. Essays received late will be penalized
by one mark per day. (For instance, a short essay marked 24/30 on its merits will be reduced
to 23/30 on the first day they are late and to 19/30 on the fifth day. University regulations
forbid the instructor to accept term work for this course after December 5.
5. No fax. It is Department policy that work transmitted by fax will not be accepted.
6. Keep a copy. It is Department policy that it is every student’s responsibility to keep a copy of
each essay submitted to a Philosophy course.
7. Submitting essays. Essays can be submitted to the instructor in class or in the locked essay
deposit box just inside the glass door to the Philosophy Department offices (Paterson 3A –
look for the Philosophy Department sign). Essays must be submitted on paper. No binders:
essays should not be enclosed in plastic or other binders except at the specific request of the
instructor. If you are submitting an essay via the Philosophy essay box, it must be deposited
there by 4:00 p.m. in order to be stamped as received on that day. Essays deposited after 4:00
p.m. will be stamped as received on the following business day. Binders may not be put in the
essay box at any time. University regulations forbid the instructor to accept term work for this
course after December 5.
8. Deferrals for term work. Before the end of term, you can apply to Registrar to defer the
final deadline for term work.
9.
Accommodation for disabilities. Students with disabilities requiring academic
accommodations in this course are encouraged to contact the Paul Menton Centre for
Students with Disabilities (500 University Centre) to complete the necessary forms. After
registering with the Centre, make an appointment to meet with me in order to discuss your
needs at least two weeks before the first in-class test or CUTV midterm exam. This will
allow for sufficient time to process your request. Please note the following deadlines for
submitting completed forms to the PMC for formally scheduled exam accommodations:
Check with Phil Dept. administrator for deadline.
10. Plagiarism. It is the responsibility of each student to understand the meaning of 'plagiarism'
as defined in the Undergraduate or Graduate Calendars, and to avoid both committing
plagiarism and aiding/abetting plagiarism by other students.
9
Suggestions for Writing a Paper
Source: Episteme Links
http://www.epistemelinks.com/index.aspx
Cf. G. J Mattey:
http://philosophy.ucdavis.edu/mattey/phi22n/paphints.html
Don't bring in extraneous details about the context in which the works were written.
Your paper assigments are focussed on a specific topic. Your paper must stick to that
topic. For example, "Descartes was a philosopher who was born in France, lived in the
Netherlands, and died in Sweden."
Do frame the nature of the philosophical problem clearly. For example, "Is it possible to
demonstrate the existence of God using no other information except about what it is to be
God?"
Don't go off on a tangent. "Some philosophers have tried to prove that God exists by
claiming that the order of nature requires an intelligent designer. Others have thought that
the world does not necessarily exist, and if so, then there must be a God which
necessarily exists and explains why the world exists. The first kind of argument is called
the 'argument from design' and the second kind is called the 'cosmological argument.'"
Do stick to the issues mentioned in the paper assignment.
Don't throw out opinions casually. Example. "How could anybody prove that God
exists? That is the kind of things human beings are just incapable of knowing."
Do give reasons for any opinion you express. "Descartes claimed that there is a nature of
God. But what evidence is there that there really is such a thing as a nature of God, rather
than just a concept of God that we mak up ourselves?"
Don't make undocumented claims about what any of the authors wrote.
Do back up your description of the philosopher's position by use of quotations from the
text. Parenthetical page references to the text are sufficient in lieu of footnotes. For
example, "According to Descartes, God has a nature and this nature includes existence.
He claims that his idea of God's nature is different from a false idea he made up himself,
like a four-sided figure that is not a square but is inscribed in a circle. 'For there are a
great many ways in which I understand that this idea is not an invention that is dependent
on my thought, but is an image of a true and immutable nature' (p. 47)."
Don't use the words of others without quotation. This is plagiarism, which is a
punishable academic offence. Your reader will be watching out for plagiarism. One good
way to recognize when you are plagiarizing is to notice any change of style, say some
sentences which use a lot of words you do not use ordinarily, or whose grammatical
structure is very different from your own.
Do use your own words to paraphrase what an author says.
10
Don't neglect to address all points in the paper topic in detail.
Do provide sufficient detail on all points, so that the grader can recognize your mastery of
them.
Don't pad your paper or eliminate vital parts to get it to the suggested length.
Do write economically. Make the paper just long enough to complete the required tasks
and no longer. If you deviate significantly from the suggested length, consider whether
you have said too much or left something out.
Don't simply write down a bunch of logically unconnected statements or assertions. For
example, "Descartes tried to prove that God exists in a couple of ways. Spinoza tried to
do the same thing, but he did it differently. Descartes just makes a lot of things up, and
Spinoza does too."
Do present the material in the form of arguments. One way of looking at an argument is
as the defense of a conclusion by appeal to premises which are acceptable to anyone who
considers them objectively, such as that it impossible to think of God except as existing.
"From the fact that I cannot think of God except as existing, it follows that existence is
inseparable form God, and that for this reason he really exists" (p. 46).
Don't use colloquial language to make a point. For example, "Descartes's second attempt
to prove God's existence was totally lame."
Do use standard language.
Don't confuse technical language with ordinary language. For example, Descartes's use
of 'nature' is sometimes different from ordinary uses, such as 'part of the earth that is not
developed by humans.'
Do explain any technical terms when you introduce them. For example, "The 'ontological
argument' is an attempt to prove that God exists simply from the definition, or nature, or
idea of God."
11
Set of Questions for the Exam.
The five exam questions will be drawn from the following list.
In the 2 h. exam you’ll be asked to reply to two (no more no less) questions.
(Exam without notes/books).
1.
What are the differences between Descartes and Chomsky?
2.
Discuss and characterize UG and is its role in language acquisition.
3.
Explain the poverty of the stimulus argument.
4.
“The mind-body problem made sense in terms of the mechanical philosophy that
Newton undermined, and has not been coherently posed since.” (Chomsky 2000: 86)
Explain and Discuss.
5.
What’s the difference between IL (internal language) and EL (external language) and
which one is the object of linguistic study? Why?
6.
What does it mean to say that Chomsky is a biological rationalist?
7.
Explain, the differences between a Pidgin and a Creole and why some rationalists
mention them?
8.
What is the importance of the Port-Royal Grammar?
9.
Explain Plato’s problem and how, respectively, Descartes and Chomsky solve it.
10.
Why are Chomsky and Descartes rationalists and how do their rationalist programs
differ?
11.
What are the main arguments supporting the view that LAD is innate? And what does
it mean to say that it is innate?
12.
Discuss Arnauld’s critique in the Fourth Set of Objections of Descartes’ argument for
the mind/body distinction and Descartes’ reply.
13.
What are the main features of Cartesian linguistics?
14.
What is the mind/body problem? How does Descartes attempt to solve it? How does
Chomsky address it?
12
15.
“The faculty of language can reasonably be regarded as a “language organ” in the
sense in which scientists speak of the visual system, or immune system, or circulatory
system, as organs of the body”. (Chomsky 2000: 4)
Explain and discuss.
16.
Are ideas innate? Why yes/no?
17.
What are Leibniz’s monads? How do they differ from Descartes’ immaterial
substances?
18.
What is the unison problem and how does Descartes solve it?
19.
What are the similarities between Descartes and Chomsky?
20.
What does it mean to say that monads are windowless?